[D1N0]

Probably not. I think their flagship APSc will compete against the D610 and A7 on a small size basis. I think the FF will be aimed more toward the high side of the middle (between the D750 and D810) and offer nearly all the D810 quality and features for less money. I think lenses for FF will be Premium more often than consumer, excellent lenses with all the features, and will be VERY EXPENSIVE.

Perhaps later there will be a less expensive FF model, but not the first one. They have to get the first one right the first time.

I think people here will positively howl at the prices.

And then they will sell very little because people will decide they cannot afford these prices and buy a Canon Nikon or Sony. You need a user base for your system.

[Mistral75]

Sure but all of those with is have three switches. (...)

Indeed, and the Pentax prototype / mock-up of a 70-200ish zoom lens only has two. So?

And I agree with monochrome: if Ricoh intended to position their first 24x36 Pentax DSLR as an affordable prosumer body, they would have issued f/4 or variable-aperture zoom lenses with it, not a f/2.8 70-200ish lens together wth HD revamped FA Limiteds.

I think they will do with the 24x36 DSLR what they have done with K-3 and 645Z: an affordable body, less expensive than its competitors, and pricey lenses.

[monochrome]

And then they will sell very little because people will decide they cannot afford these prices and buy a Canon Nikon or Sony. You need a user base for your system.

They'll have the user base they want - it just isn't the user base we assume they should have. We keep thinking they want to knock Canon off the perch, but that just isn't so. They plan to be an alternative, not a competitor.

They want to sell fewer. They're a small company supporting three mounts (645, Q, K) with two sensor sizes in the K-mount. They need to build out the Q line, build out an entire FF digital lens line and redo the entire 645 lens line. At the same time they have to keep APSc fresh and relevant and let it be the gateway drug for K-mount. They're just not going to play CaNikon's high-volume, low margin game - they can't win at it.

What they CAN do is sell fewer cameras with higer unit profit margin to a discerning group of shooters who will pay up for the value equation of more features for the price and the Pentax DNA. Over time they might even develop a small, loyal Dealer network based on lower volume, higher margin and relationship marketing (like Hasselblad).

At the same time they're starting this S1 line to attract younger buyers into the mount. That measn they're thinking about 2040.

I know it sounds risky, but that's just because it is unusual. They are patient, disciplined and absolutely dogged about hard work. I'll be dead, unfortunately, but I wish I could be here to see their victory.

[Na Horuk]

I wonder what the people who demand FF will say when Pentax Ricoh releases an FF camera that costs $4000 Will they demand APS-H then?

[Vantage-Point]

My hope is that Ricoh Pentax can work with Samsung and get the first Full Frame sensor that is backside illuminated with no AA filter. Samsung has already done this with their APS-C camera the NX-1. This type of CMOS chip runs cooler and faster than the regular design of CMOS chip being that its circuitry is made from copper instead of polysilicon. This would be unique for Pentax.

[luftfluss]

That's a conclusion I will leave to you, as I did not say that.

Actually, you pretty much did. You questioned why Pentax would add a feature to new lenses that they had not previously included. And, implicit in my answer, was "product improvement".

Comparing with Olympus is useless because we are talking about Pentax who don't have 5 axis stabilisation. There is only so much room for compensation in a body. At large magnification the compensation will at some point start to falter and/or run into the limited space there is for movement (earlier with Full frame if you want a compact body, which Pentax wants). That is less of a problem for in lens OIS. That is why I think Pentax will take a two way strategy on this. IBIS and OIS for longer lenses.

You made the rather broad statement that IBIS is less effective OIS. In my experience this was once true, but I don't believe it necessarily is now. Can you show where the IBIS in the K-3 is less effective than OIS? That said, I do agree with you that OIS is better in long lenses for the sake of having a better-stabilized view in the OVF.

[RonHendriks1966]

I wonder what the people who demand FF will say when Pentax Ricoh releases an FF camera that costs $4000 Will they demand APS-H then?

My hope is that Ricoh Pentax can work with Samsung and get the first Full Frame sensor that is backside illuminated with no AA filter. Samsung has already done this with their APS-C camera the NX-1. This type of CMOS chip runs cooler and faster than the regular design of CMOS chip being that its circuitry is made from copper instead of polysilicon. This would be unique for Pentax.

First I want to see testing by DxO from this sensor. See what it is bringing. I'm curious about it.

[Zygonyx]

Second, i doubt Pentax is gonna rework with Samsung... there must be more negotiation margin / product reliability with Sony that yet produces basically all Ricoh-Pentax used sensors...
But we will see.

[Clavius]

I wonder what the people who demand FF will say when Pentax Ricoh releases an FF camera that costs $4000 Will they demand APS-H then?

Why would Pentax release an FF camera twice the cost of the competition?

---------- Post added 22-09-14 at 08:46 ----------

My hope is that Ricoh Pentax can work with Samsung and get the first Full Frame sensor that is backside illuminated with no AA filter. Samsung has already done this with their APS-C camera the NX-1. This type of CMOS chip runs cooler and faster than the regular design of CMOS chip being that its circuitry is made from copper instead of polysilicon. This would be unique for Pentax.

That's very doubtfull. With the previous Samsung/Pentax collaboration, Samsung stabbed Pentax in the back. They would have to give Pentax a very sweet deal on those sensors for that to happen.

[gazonk]

There is FA35/2

Sure. I was just commenting on "Zeiss Sonnar FE 35/2.8 comes to mind.".

[D1N0]

Actually, you pretty much did. You questioned why Pentax would add a feature to new lenses that they had not previously included. And, implicit in my answer, was "product improvement".



You made the rather broad statement that IBIS is less effective OIS. In my experience this was once true, but I don't believe it necessarily is now. Can you show where the IBIS in the K-3 is less effective than OIS? That said, I do agree with you that OIS is better in long lenses for the sake of having a better-stabilized view in the OVF.

Actually I did not. A focus limiter would not be seen as an improvement by people who don't need it. Just something that can break the functionality of the lens by getting stuck. I was making the IBIS statement in the context of Pentax and not broader. Pentax claims the K-3 has up to 3.5 stop compensation depending on FL (we have not seen any real tests but a valued forum member did a thing on the K-7 with some disturbing results: Falk Lumo: Pentax shake reduction revisited ) 3.5 EV is the optimum level. Good VR lenses will get 4 to 4.5 stops (more reliably). You will have to check out that this claim is made according to CIPA standards though.

[Rondec]

And then they will sell very little because people will decide they cannot afford these prices and buy a Canon Nikon or Sony. You need a user base for your system.

The point is not necessarily to sell a huge number of full frame cameras. It is to give an upgrade path. This improves perception of the brand and takes away a significant argument for going Canon/Nikon over Pentax. In addition, it should make them money.

The reality is that even if they priced a K Mount full frame at 1500 dollars, they would never sell even close to the number of 6D/D610 cameras out there. But they don't need to. They just need to make sure their projections are reasonable and on target and then price the camera where it needs to be in order to turn a profit -- and include features to compete at that level.

Cheaper full frame may come down the road. This is clearly just a first step, but for now those who need cheaper gear would be wise to go with a mid-level APS-C camera. There is a lot of quality there already.

[Na Horuk]

Why would Pentax release an FF camera twice the cost of the competition?

Its not really about competition, is it? If Pentax makes a camera in the range of the D810, but $300 cheaper.. who would buy it? People already have their D810, and I doubt they would change systems just to get one that is "almost as good and a little cheaper". Pentax can position their FF either in the "cheap FF" tier and hope to catch people going from APSC to FF - but these are not really "pro" cameras, not any more than the K-3; or Pentax can try to beat the Canikon flagships. And it has to beat them, not merely offer similar features at a similar price.
Now, $4000 was a bit of hyperbole, but it was meant to get the point across. We shouldn't expect Pentax FF to be super cheap. It might be, but it might not be.

[Clavius]

Its not really about competition, is it? If Pentax makes a camera in the range of the D810, but $300 cheaper.. who would buy it? People already have their D810, and I doubt they would change systems just to get one that is "almost as good and a little cheaper". Pentax can position their FF either in the "cheap FF" tier and hope to catch people going from APSC to FF - but these are not really "pro" cameras, not any more than the K-3; or Pentax can try to beat the Canikon flagships. And it has to beat them, not merely offer similar features at a similar price.
Now, $4000 was a bit of hyperbole, but it was meant to get the point across. We shouldn't expect Pentax FF to be super cheap. It might be, but it might not be.

Your point is clear and valid. But then, why would the average Pentaxian upgrade to such an expensive FF, if he can just as well mount all his legacy FF lenses on a cheapo A7?

[Mistral75]

(...) why would the average Pentaxian upgrade to such an expensive FF, if he can just as well mount all his legacy FF lenses on a cheapo A7?

'cause (s)he is a Pentaxian!